Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Republicans confirm that Obama is, in fact, violating the Constitution, but admit that they have no power to impeach him because nobody's given him a blowjob yet   (foxnews.com) divider line 261
    More: Unlikely, President Obama, Republicans, organizations, Xavier Becerra, legal standing  
•       •       •

3078 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Feb 2014 at 2:50 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



261 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-16 01:28:50 PM  
He is married and it does occasionally happen.
 
2014-02-16 01:36:49 PM  
So more bullsh*t, noise, and innuendo but no actual substance

/why am I not surprised?
//a entire party of f*cking empty suits
 
2014-02-16 01:38:22 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: So more bullsh*t, noise, and innuendo but no actual substance

/why am I not surprised?
//a entire party of f*cking empty suits


They have proof! They just can't show it to anybody because.
 
2014-02-16 01:39:27 PM  

Steve Zodiac: MaudlinMutantMollusk: So more bullsh*t, noise, and innuendo but no actual substance

/why am I not surprised?
//a entire party of f*cking empty suits

They have proof! They just can't show it to anybody because.


and futhermore
 
2014-02-16 01:42:10 PM  
Yet more proof of Obama's reckless lawlessness is found..

How much more will it take libulardos?
 
2014-02-16 01:42:58 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Yet more proof of Obama's reckless lawlessness is found..

How much more will it take libulardos?


DRINK!

/you did that on purpose
 
2014-02-16 01:43:26 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Yet more proof of Obama's reckless lawlessness is found..

How much more will it take libulardos?


actual proof?
 
2014-02-16 01:44:20 PM  
Executive branch enforces the law. Doesn't that imply executive branch can postpone or even ignore laws? Within the scope of power defined by the constitution, I mean. Obviously they can't go willy-nilly and do whatever they want.

But isn't it kind of like the Justice Department not prosecuting DOMA cases?
 
2014-02-16 01:45:46 PM  
Prove it, sh*tweasels.
 
2014-02-16 01:48:20 PM  
How DARE the President execute the laws of this nation, in such a way, that no one can prove any damage done?  Doesn't he realize this seriously impedes the perception that the government is always wrong? And as we all know, perception IS reality, so the President is usurping Yahweh's power, and that shall not stand...
 
2014-02-16 01:48:29 PM  

BunkyBrewman: Doktor_Zhivago: Yet more proof of Obama's reckless lawlessness is found..

How much more will it take libulardos?

actual proof?


I happen to know that a true patriot, one Eduardo Sally Jessie Raphael Cruz Estavez has a list of all the various and sundry examples of Obama's dark usurpations of our pure as the driven snow constitution. You'll see libturds. YOU'LL SEE THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE!
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2014-02-16 01:48:42 PM  

Steve Zodiac: MaudlinMutantMollusk: So more bullsh*t, noise, and innuendo but no actual substance

/why am I not surprised?
//a entire party of f*cking empty suits


They have proof! They just can't show it to anybody because.


What does the wind look like?
 
2014-02-16 01:51:51 PM  
So, the baggers are pretty much just doing this...yet again:

i595.photobucket.com
 
2014-02-16 01:52:42 PM  

NFA: Steve Zodiac: MaudlinMutantMollusk: So more bullsh*t, noise, and innuendo but no actual substance

/why am I not surprised?
//a entire party of f*cking empty suits


They have proof! They just can't show it to anybody because.

What does the wind look like?


I don't know, but I heard it's called Murray, or something.
 
2014-02-16 02:15:34 PM  
Since when did any of the politicians give a ratz azz about the constitution lately?
 
2014-02-16 02:16:50 PM  

hubiestubert: How DARE the President execute the laws of this nation, in such a way, that no one can prove any damage done?  Doesn't he realize this seriously impedes the perception that the government is always wrong? And as we all know, perception IS reality, so the President is usurping Yahweh's power, and that shall not stand...


Obviously what we need is a brave Republican woman -- maybe even a man -- with deft fingers and not much of a gag reflex...
 
2014-02-16 02:29:04 PM  
fta Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., defended the president's actions Sunday, telling "Fox News" that Obama is "making sure laws are written and executed" to help Americans.

I love that Fox News puts "Fox News" in quotes. "Fox News".
 
2014-02-16 02:37:01 PM  
Amusing that some people always divert the issue from sexual harassment to 'it was just a blow job'. Don't misunderstand me; he's better than the current CinC, but don't kid yourself. He was the president of a company, mouth-farking an intern. And don't give me that 'she was of legal age' bullshiat.
 
2014-02-16 02:42:49 PM  

twistedmetal: Since when did any of the politicians give a ratz azz about the constitution lately?



Since January 2009.
 
2014-02-16 02:42:58 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: So more bullsh*t, noise, and innuendo but no actual substance


Executive orders are unconstitutional!!1!

...except when Republicans do it.

More whining...more inaction.   Because he hasn't done anything warranting action, and his very existence warrants whining by GOP teatards
 
2014-02-16 02:48:53 PM  

Notabunny: fta Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., defended the president's actions Sunday, telling "Fox News" that Obama is "making sure laws are written and executed" to help Americans.

I love that Fox News puts "Fox News" in quotes. "Fox News".


They only really need to put the "news" part in quotes.
 
2014-02-16 02:52:34 PM  
Obama has used executive order less than modern U.S. presidents -- 167 times so far, compared to 238 for President Carter and 256 for President Reagan.

Nice of FOX "News" to note that.  Apparently, the online edition still has some shred of journalistic integrity.

Is Roger Ailes unaware of the internets?
 
2014-02-16 02:52:47 PM  
"Obama is too violating the Constitution because shut up."
 
2014-02-16 02:55:13 PM  

Notabunny: I love that Fox News puts "Fox News" in quotes.


What you find ironic, journalists consider proper, standard punctuation.
 
2014-02-16 02:56:16 PM  
They always have toe power to impeach. What they lack is the cohesiveness to assure that an impeachment vote will succeed...and a Senate hearing that will be an actual hearing than a bunch of Democrats laughing at House Republicans for thinking they'd be able to remove him from office this way.
 
2014-02-16 02:56:28 PM  
Given that a republican 'confirmation' that it was raining outside would warrant a personal trip outside to verify said claim, I'm going to venture that the 'fact' mentioned in the headline is specious at best.
 
2014-02-16 02:57:10 PM  

GoldSpider: Notabunny: I love that Fox News puts "Fox News" in quotes.

What you find ironic, journalists consider proper, standard punctuation.


What does that have to do with FOX?
 
2014-02-16 02:59:37 PM  
Any court case would result in the court finding that he was executing the executive power to make minor changes to implementation schedules of a law which had been passed, while fully retaining its substantive meaning and intent.

In order to succeed in claiming this was unconstitutional you would need to a: show he has changed something other than details of implementation within normal executive limits, and b: that there was a plaintiff harmed by the change in order to bring a case.

That republicans should shriek about it then openly admit that they could not achieve EITHER of these things (yes they admit they cannot find anyone at all harmed by the president's decisions, and yet they still oppose him.. think on that) is pathetic.
 
Boe
2014-02-16 03:01:55 PM  

John Buck 41: Amusing that some people always divert the issue from sexual harassment to 'it was just a blow job'. Don't misunderstand me; he's better than the current CinC, but don't kid yourself. He was the president of a company, mouth-farking an intern. And don't give me that 'she was of legal age' bullshiat.


I don't recall Monica Lewinsky filing a sexual harassment complaint.
 
2014-02-16 03:02:02 PM  

John Buck 41: Amusing that some people always divert the issue from sexual harassment to 'it was just a blow job'. Don't misunderstand me; he's better than the current CinC, but don't kid yourself. He was the president of a company, mouth-farking an intern. And don't give me that 'she was of legal age' bullshiat.


You seem to have missed the 'CONSENTING' part of 'two consenting adults'. Sleazy that he cheated on Hillary? Yes. But it was a personal matter between himself, Hillary and Monica, NOT something that should have been brought before a grand jury, and CERTAINLY not something he should have been impeached over.
 
2014-02-16 03:03:35 PM  

John Buck 41: And don't give me that 'she was of legal age' bullshiat.


So, she wasn't?

Teh librul medias done lied to me!!1!
 
2014-02-16 03:04:03 PM  
Also known as "not violating the Constitution" or "appeasing mouth-breathing stump jumpers".
 
2014-02-16 03:04:10 PM  
I love the mental gymnastics that this line of argument requires.

There's a law we hate.
Obama is giving small businesses, that we love, a reprieve from this law we hate.
Obama is therefore bad.

The only way (and the actual reason) this makes sense is one that Republicans can't say out loud.

There's a law we hate.
If it doesn't hurt people, we can't make others hate it.
Obama isn't using the law to hurt others.
Obama is therefore bad for not giving us ammunition against him, and we have try o force him to hurt people so we can pretend to be indignant.
 
2014-02-16 03:05:06 PM  
It's wrong, but since we can't find anybody whose been injured by it, we can't do anything about it. In the same way, Obama is guilty of murder, but since they can't find anyone he stabbed to death, they can't charge him for it.
 
2014-02-16 03:05:21 PM  
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, told "Fox News Sunday" that congressional Republicans think the president abused the government's separation of powers by using the executive orders to sidestep Congress and delay the law's employer mandate.

Bush did the same thing with Medicare Part D.
 
2014-02-16 03:06:26 PM  
Funny how the constitution is almost irrelevant to those same key republicans when talking about things like marriage, the patriot act, gitmo, etc.
 
2014-02-16 03:07:00 PM  

nmrsnr: I love the mental gymnastics that this line of argument requires.

There's a law we hate.
Obama is giving small businesses, that we love, a reprieve from this law we hate.
Obama is therefore bad.

The only way (and the actual reason) this makes sense is one that Republicans can't say out loud.

There's a law we hate.
If it doesn't hurt people, we can't make others hate it.
Obama isn't using the law to hurt others.
Obama is therefore bad for not giving us ammunition against him, and we have try o force him to hurt people so we can pretend to be indignant.


By using his authority as head of the Executive Branch, he's jerking the rug out from underneath the GOP.  They'd planned on using those penalty costs from the ACA as ammunition in the 2014 elections and here he's gone and removed them from being a problem until 2016...

Of course they're squealing in fury.
 
2014-02-16 03:07:05 PM  
It will be truly a fine dessert if Obama can survive his presidency without an impeachment.
But if Republicans do well in the next election all you hear about will be impeachment.
 
2014-02-16 03:07:50 PM  

John Buck 41: Amusing that some people always divert the issue from sexual harassment to 'it was just a blow job'. Don't misunderstand me; he's better than the current CinC, but don't kid yourself. He was the president of a company, mouth-farking an intern. And don't give me that 'she was of legal age' bullshiat.


I think the point here is that Republicans still bring up this issue, while we're not allowed to discuss (let alone prosecute) someone for falsely giving information to get us into a war that cost trillions of dollars and tens of thousands of casualties.

/priorities, I guess
 
2014-02-16 03:12:20 PM  

GoldSpider: Notabunny: I love that Fox News puts "Fox News" in quotes.

What you find ironic, journalists consider proper, standard punctuation.


Are you saying that proper nouns belong in quotes?
 
2014-02-16 03:12:21 PM  
Is anyone else reminded of Libya?

"OMG! X IS HAPPENING! IT NEEDS TO STOP! OBAMA IS LITERALLY HITLER FOR NOT STOPPING IT!"
*Congress refuses to do anything about x*
*Obama does y to do something about x*
"OMG! OBAMA DID Y! WHY DID HE GO AROUND CONGRESS? OBAMA IS LITERALLY HITLER!"
 
2014-02-16 03:12:51 PM  

John Buck 41: Amusing that some people always divert the issue from sexual harassment to 'it was just a blow job'. Don't misunderstand me; he's better than the current CinC, but don't kid yourself. He was the president of a company, mouth-farking an intern. And don't give me that 'she was of legal age' bullshiat.


"Women aren't responsible for their completely voluntary groupyish behavior. Truly only men are capable of being sexual aggressors (as I've always had to beg, borrow, and plead to get merely boring missionary with every non-prostitute I've ever been with) and women never through themselves at men with power."
 
2014-02-16 03:13:42 PM  
However, he said critics would have a tough time winning in court because Congress lacks the so-called "legal standing" to present the case and they would have a "tough time" finding somebody hurt enough by the delays to be a good plaintiff.

Obviously the law is destroying 'murrca.
 
2014-02-16 03:14:46 PM  
However, he said critics would have a tough time winning in court because Congress lacks the so-called "legal standing" to present the case and they would have a "tough time" finding somebody hurt enough by the delays to be a good plaintiff.

If only they could "prove" that he'd done something "wrong."
 
2014-02-16 03:15:16 PM  
If the gop doesn't get the Senate back in 2014, the impeachment will be thier last act.
 
2014-02-16 03:15:37 PM  
Such utter BS.

I presented a factual count of executive order comparison to a red-meat conservative.


He didn't blink an eye...said it's about what he's doing with them.
But he didn't know what he was doing with them...when I asked.


So basically, if you don't like the person...they're violating the Constitution.
You don't even have to know what you don't like...
 
2014-02-16 03:15:42 PM  

rev. dave: It will be truly a fine dessert if Obama can survive his presidency without an impeachment.
But if Republicans do well in the next election all you hear about will be impeachment.


And that worked out so well last time.  2016 is gonna be a f*cking bloodbath for them already, and repeating the other major mistake they made with Clinton ain't gonna help.

Please, proceed, teabaggers.
 
2014-02-16 03:16:06 PM  

HawgWild: Executive branch enforces the law. Doesn't that imply executive branch can postpone or even ignore laws? Within the scope of power defined by the constitution, I mean. Obviously they can't go willy-nilly and do whatever they want.

But isn't it kind of like the Justice Department not prosecuting DOMA cases?


As far as I know, Obama hasn't used signing statements to pass laws while simultaneously saying he will ignore them if he chooses.
 
2014-02-16 03:16:21 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: What does that have to do with FOX?


I was referring to how actual news organizations still follow the AP Stylebook.
 
2014-02-16 03:17:15 PM  

Crotchrocket Slim: John Buck 41: Amusing that some people always divert the issue from sexual harassment to 'it was just a blow job'. Don't misunderstand me; he's better than the current CinC, but don't kid yourself. He was the president of a company, mouth-farking an intern. And don't give me that 'she was of legal age' bullshiat.

"Women aren't responsible for their completely voluntary groupyish behavior. Truly only men are capable of being sexual aggressors (as I've always had to beg, borrow, and plead to get merely boring missionary with every non-prostitute I've ever been with) and women never through themselves at men with power."


*throw not through, how that got autocorrected I don't know
 
Displayed 50 of 261 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report